Where Islam spreads, freedom dies

On Sunday 26 May a young man was arrested in the early morning for having made death threats against Marine Le Pen on the internet. The president of the FN complaints that she was not kept informed.

A young man of 16, who made death threats against Marine Le Pen, was arrested by the police on Sunday 26 May at 6 am in his home. According to Valeurs Actuelles which reveals the information, he is said to have been identified on the internet using the pseudonym "Le Pen Killer" on a forum before being placed under surveillance.

The police, judging these threats to be serious, decided to apprehend him fearing that he would move into action on Monday 27 May.

Fdesouche.com has the "farewell" post this user made on a forum. Reading it, there seems to be no question that the intent was serious. It's not clear if he was a Muslim or not. He seems a bit more articulate than I would expect from the average Muslim. But he claims to have been personally acquainted with a North African who died during a Front National march. He also says his cousin got him a suitable weapon to use when he was travelling in Russia.

For too many years, the family Le Pen has been perverting people with fine words, for years and years they have formed part of the people who maintain hatred towards others in this country, without her and her father and their party, France would have been much better socially speaking. This woman and her father have done far too much damage to France in these last few decades, I won't bother mentioning all the monstrous scandals of the FN, that would take my whole evening, starting with the man of North African origin who was thrown into the Seine during an FN demonstration.

This man, I knew him personally, he died for no reason, just because of his origins.

In 3 days, Marine Le Pen will be going to the RMC building, I know exactly where she's staying, I know the route that between the RMC building and the Rue Oradour Sur Glane, the RMC office.

From my cousin who went on a trip to Russia a year and a half ago, I was able to obtain the suitable "weapon" which will allow me to conduct a major strike.

Certainly, I'm running the risk of not coming out of it unscathed, but at least I will have revenged all the men for which this party lacked respect. This will be brief.

This is the 24th, there are still 3 days, so few days but so many hours ...

I hope this forum goes on well anyway, hope I don't damage your reputation by posting this message publicly here...

UPDATE: The BBC reports that Marine Le Pen is to be prosecuted over her remarks comparing Muslim street prayers to the Nazi occupation. In a "secret vote", an EU parliamentary committee voted to remove her immunity from prosecution this week. So, like all who oppose the consensus of the multicult, she faces attacks on two fronts: the bureaucratic power of the state transformed into an ideological weapon on the one hand, and actual weapons used by Muslim and leftist thugs and assassins on the other.

Marine Le Pen, the leader of the French far-Right leader faces charges for comparing Islamic prayers to Nazi occupation following a secret European parliamentary committee vote, according to reports.

Mrs Le Pen, leader of the National Front, told a rally in 2010 that the places in France where Muslims worshipped in the streets were "occupied territory".

"For those who want to talk a lot about World War Two, if it's about occupation, then we could also talk about it (Muslim prayers in the streets), because that is occupation of territory," she said at a gathering in Lyon.

In December 2012, French authorities asked the European Parliament to lift Mrs Le Pen's immunity as a European Parliament member (MEP) so she could be prosecuted.

The BBC reports that a secret vote, held earlier this week, voted "overwhelmingly" to remove Mrs Le Pen's immunity.

The vote would need to be ratified formally in parliament, but the BBC states that this would likely be a formality. There was no comment from Mrs Le Pen.

...The figures are frightening. According to an Opinion-Way study, more than a third of 18-24-year-olds feel antipathy towards Muslims, which is 10 times more than for Catholics or Jews. Young people are thus more virulent than the general average of the 1000 people polled. Only 4% of them believe in the tolerance of the Muslim religion and 40% consider it to be sectarian.

Islam isn't the only one that gets it. Thus, more than half of 18-24-year-olds consider Jews "closer to Israel than to France". Around 43% define them as a "group withdrawn into itself". Finally, 20% judge that "their influence of society is too great."

This is an article from our Dutch correspondent. It is translated from the Christian newspaper 'Trouw'. Below it is an article on the same topic from the Irish Times.

The district of the Hague called ‘Schilderswijk’* is developing into an enclave of orthodox Muslims. There are together more orthodox Muslims than elsewhere in the city and they want to apply their rules on the street.

Non-Muslims residents and moderate Muslims have steadily growing problems. They say that on the street they are held accountable for things the fundamentalist majority does not like, such as smoking and the use of alcohol and pork on the street.

“Trouw” (daily Christian paper) had in the past two months regularly visited the area called “The tip of the Forgotten Triangle” (The neighborhood is named so because it was, in the past, 'forgotten' during the time of urban renewal). Most houses are old and have central porches, where it is estimated 5,000 inhabitants live. Nearby are three mosques that are known as Salafist.

“The tip of the triangle” is now called "The Sharia Triangle” or even “The point of the Sword” according to interviews with dozens of residents, former residents, young people, volunteers and professionals from government and civil society organizations. For years they have seen the development of a 'small kalifaatje' and the introduction of a 'mini-Sharia'.

There are known examples of police officers on duty who had reported from the neighborhood that they were ordered to leave. Reason: ‘the residents are able to solve problems by themselves’. Luckily , say people living in the neighborhood, the agents did not leave; but they fear the day that this will truly happen.

Young girls are addressed by veiled women, who show their disapproval about 'skirts above the knee" and "dresses with spaghetti straps”. A veiled Muslim woman reacts: "Women in the deepest core of the Dutch ‘bible belt’ still wear long skirts and nobody is working on Sunday in Staphorst . The majority states. That's what the so-called democracy in the Netherlands is built on. But ‘Oh woe’ if somewhere or another foreign group is becoming the majority,” she concludes.

Crime has recently dropped down in ‘The Triangle’ due to youth gangs being tackled by the police. But nearby it is been said that the "fear of the wrath of Allah” also plays a part. The influence of the strict believers would play an important role in security in the area, because even hardened street boys bow their heads for the "true believers".

The Hague municipality was asked yesterday morning for a response. But could not give, in the short term, a 'careful and substantive response to this complex issue".

*Schilderwijk translated: district of the painters. Is so named as all streets are named after famous Dutch and Flamish painters like Rubens, Rembrandt etc. Was originally built to house poor and lower middle class Dutch between approx. 1860 to approx. the 1930s (the market area). From mid 1970s it gradually became an immigrant neighbourhood.

There have been calls for an urgent debate in the Dutch parliament about the integration of Muslim immigrants amid claims that one area of The Hague, known locally as “the Sharia triangle”, is being run by a form of unofficial Sharia police.

The claims relate to the district of Schilderswijk, about two kilometres from the city centre, where an almost entirely Muslim population of some 5,000 people surrounds the El Islam mosque, fuelling criticism that the government has failed to ensure a proper ethnic mix in schools and local housing. One recent investigation, in which local people were extensively interviewed, concluded that Schilderswijk had become “orthodox Muslim territory” which was now largely ignored by the city authorities, by politicians and even by the police, on the grounds that it had become self-regulating.

The investigation found that orthodox Muslims had become so dominant that they were dictating what people in the neighbourhood wore and how they behaved.
“The norms of the majority are beginning to take over,” it said.

In the case of women, dress was a particular issue. One woman told how her daughter had been approached and told her short skirt was inappropriate, while her son had been called a “kaffir” – a racist term formerly used in colonial South Africa to refer to a black person – for smoking.

A youth who had previously been involved in local gangs said that criminality had dropped off, not because of the police, but because he and his friends were “afraid of the wrath of Allah”.

Another man said he felt he was gradually being driven out of his home because he had a dog, and many traditional Muslims tended not to keep or favour dogs.

A veiled Muslim woman, however, defended Islamic practices, and said dressing modestly would “do the locals good”. She pointed out that women in the Dutch ultra-conservative, largely Protestant, Bible Belt also wore long dresses, and that shops there were closed on Sunday – as many in Schilderswijk were on Fridays.

Local police chief Michel de Roos said: “We have no indications there is a form of Sharia police here. That is not to say it does not happen, but we are unaware of it.”
Last Tuesday, social affairs minister Lodewijk Asscher and right-wing Freedom Party leader Geert Wilders paid separate visits to the area, and are to report to parliament.

This is was written by regular contributor Johnny Rottenborough. He's having trouble posting for some reason so I am doing it for him instead.

ITV News and the Daily Mail report that one of the Woolwich terror suspects, Michael Adebolajo, was filmed in 2009 at a demonstration against the English Defence League in Harrow.

When I wrote on Islam versus Europe about the Qur’an’s habit of describing non-Muslims as sub-human (see ‘Cattle, Apes and Pigs’), one of the videos I embedded featured Adebolajo whipping the Muslim mob into a fine old frenzy and I transcribed some of his remarks:

allahu akbar. There is no god but Allah, Mohammed is the Messenger of Allah. We are not scared of kuffar. My brothers, remain in your ranks and do not be scared of these filthy kuffar. They are pigs. They are worse than cattle. allahu akbar. There is no god but Allah, Mohammed is the Messenger of Allah.

Pause the video at 1:35 and you’ll see a placard reading ‘Stop the Fascist BNP’, a slogan of the fascistic rent-a-mob outfit Unite Against Fascism, one of whose founding signatories is the Prime Minister, David Cameron.

"This morning Ahus hospital and the Islamic Council of Norway (IRN) signed an agreement that ensures that the hospital will serve halal food. Thus, from Monday the hospital will serve several halal meals for their Muslim patients.

The meat will come from Nortura, approved by IRN. The food is also marked with a visible logo from IRN. Ahus is the first hospital in Norway with such approval. Food with halal labelling is intended for Muslim patients."

He had had enough of the "decadence of western morals". So the "young North African" put an enormous paving stone into his rucksack. In mid-afternoon, he went to throw it through the window of the sex shop "Sex appeal" in Bolzano, in Trentino-Alto Adige. He then remained, calmly awaiting the arrival of the police "while shouting about the glory of Islam". Between shouts, he puffed on his cigarette.

The manager, Giovanni Lo Iacono, is still terrified of it: "It was 5.30 pm on Friday afternoon, I was chilling inside the ship when I heard a terrible crash and I saw the shop window explode. At first I though a car had smashed into it. If the rock had fallen on my head, it would have killed me."

"Outside," he said, "the street was full of people. The shop window might also have fallen on someone. It's very heavy, made with anti-burglary double glazing. We needed a crane to install it."

The multicult thrives in the Netherlands, too, as the following article makes clear. But the commentary of Dutch Counterjihad activist E J Bron shows that there is also resistance to it.

These are not my translations, but come from a Dutch correspondent.

The British woman, who the perpetrator spoke to seconds after the gruesome murder in London, had asked him: what possessed him? And she proves it: ‘we all have the choice not to give in to the fear’, says Joris Luyendijk.

Who? Journalist, columnist of this newspaper, lives in London.

What? A terrorist does not kill many people, but sows fear in many.

Fear is a bad counselor, and after such a murder as Woolwich (London) - last Wednesday - I always keep one thing in mind: a terrorist does not want to make many people dead. A terrorist wants to make many people mad with fear.

Everyone can decide for him or herself whether the creeps with a machete, who had killed a British soldier, will succeed. The Jihadist terrorists have no army. And despite all their propaganda, the average Muslim still has nothing to do with them. But terrorists are trying to get at us where we can be really vulnerable: In our brain!

Unfortunately, I am quite used to attacks and violence; when I was a Middle East correspondent in East Jerusalem, a bus was blown up, several times, diagonally opposite our house. Once our neighbor found a hand of a victim in his garden.

Like other people who work in war zones, I have to deal with the question: how do you deal with fear that is released by seeing, through a camera, an obvious disturbed man with bloody hands shouting that no one is safe?

My answer: realize that you have a choice not to give in to fear. The most extreme example was given immediately after the attack yesterday. By a lady who held, in the best British tradition, her upper lip stiff and came up to the offender. She asked what he was planning and heard that the man now wanted to kill police officers. The woman told afterwards in an interview: I asked him if that was a reasonable thing to do.

Growling Tigers

Fear is a vital evolutionary reflex. But imagine what would had happened if they (people of today) were cavemen with a screen in their cave who see, day in and day out, images of growling hungry tigers and lions? That is the universe in which we are living now. We see frightening images and an essential part of our brain does not understand that these things are very exceptional and take place far away from us. In Israel, year after year, far more people died in traffic accidents than in attacks. But it does not feel that way.

The terrorists have cornered this part of our brain. That is our Achilles heel in an era of ubiquitous cameras and social and mass media.

That the perpetrators of Woolwich wanted to frighten us, makes them terrorists. But the ones who keep a cool head also have other questions afterwards: is this a psychopath grabbing an alibi for his bloodlust? Whether he really believes that the UK is at war and why he attacked a soldier? In the latter case, you must conclude that America has been exeuting opponents in Pakistan, Yemen and Afghanistan in the same way for years. But that happens with drones and the perpetrators give no interviews afterwards.

Naive

Anyone who thinks that all aggression must be politically motivated makes the problem even bigger than it already is. And who ever thinks positively about terror encourages the latter too. But it's just so naive to think that yesterday's events are by definition independent of the foreign policy of the West.

And E J Bron's reply.

Joris Luyendijk contributes ‘cents in the church bag’ after the massacre on the streets of London. “What can we do to deprive terrorists of the lust to kill? There comes ‘insightful Joris’ with something original in mind.

Joris: “Fear is a bad counselor, and after such a murder as Woolwich (London) - last Wednesday - I always keep one thing in mind: a terrorist does not want to make many people dead. A terrorist wants to make many people mad with fear.
Everyone can decide for him or herself whether the creeps with a machete, who had killed a British soldier, will succeed.
The fact that the perpetrators of Woolwich wanted to scare us herein, makes them terrorists. "

Jesus Christ! What a level of pompous pseudo-intellectuality does this male reach here? By this frivolous coquetry, he responds to an attack on the West, on its own culture and its own people. He believes he is defending Western values. But the way he is choosing is not only frivolous and coquettish but also stupid. Of course there is an absolute correlation between the amount of victims a terrorist makes and the amount of fear he sows.

Joris goes further by playing the card of moral equivalence. That means: he will judge, without taking moral positions as such. This is the specialty of Luyendijk and his henchmen. They shall refrain from any moral judgment, but. . . . . . if the West is to be condemned, then they will be at the front.

In the vision of people who cherish the system of moral equivalence impeding someone is always wrong; even though you hinder in one case a murderer and in the other case an ambulance worker. It is very ‘cool’, because Joris is ‘cool’. Joris and his cronies would have said about the attempt on Hitler’s life in July 1944 : "Look. Murdering Jews is of course reprehensible, but the attack on Hitler is for sure not that nice too! What does Luyendijk say in this case?
Here it goes:

Joris: "(...)He really means ( the terrorist) that the UK is at war, and therefore he had attacked a soldier? In the latter case, you must conclude that America has been executing opponents in Pakistan, Yemen and Afghanistan in the same way for years. But that happens with drones and the perpetrators give no interviews afterwards’

Does Joris say (mean) that the actions of Western armies are as terrorist as those of the Muslims who had cut off a man’s head in a street in London? Was Bouyerie, the murderer of van Gogh, a legitimate soldier Joris? The language of Luyendijk is very messy, but this is what I read and I do not see how you could interpret it differently.

"The perpetrators gave no interviews afterwards," said Joris, but in the West it is nevertheless true that the government is accountable to Parliament. So how is "no interviews" be explained?. What the hell it is all about?

The supporters of the ‘moral equivalence thought’ claim actually that they see no reason for choosing a side in the conflict between Islam and the West. This has consequences. For example: what should Luyendijk do when he meets an Islamic authority figure? Would he grant him the same authority as the one he grants to a Western cop? That would be consistent. But if Luyendijk will indeed act that way, he surely will be, with the greatest ease, an accomplice of Islamic attackers.
Would Luyendijk go to the police when he gets ‘the slightest smell’ of a planned attack? Or would he go around the corner to stand by in order to be the first journalist present? If Luyendijk is not going to provide direct services or an aiding hand (to the Muslim attackers), I would like to hear, why he would not do that?
Doesn’t he deliver, right now, by his idiotic perception, a very important service to the Muslim torturers and murderers?

The conception that judges acts as such, without looking at the background or context, is widely espoused in left-wing circles. Left wingers can not act differently, because they fail to see that NOT all cultures are equal to each other. Due to their distorted view they cannot get out of their beaks that the West, although not perfect, OBVIOUSLY had built the best society the world has ever seen. At the same time they eagerly devour the fruits of the West. If you talk to them on this inconsistency ‘of sawing the tree from which you eat’, their statement reads that "criticism" is a good thing to keep the tree strong. Yes, that's true. But there is a difference between conscientious, honest criticism and false deception. The claim that a soldier, who is firing a rocket in Afghanistan, is the moral equal of Islamic terrorist murderers is deceptive. And this deception is deliberately placed in position. Here a lie is willingly and knowingly told.

The situation is crystal clear. Islam is the global aggressor. And what an aggressor? There's no ethical brake on. That's unbridled cruelty and merciless violence. From the filthy civilization that Islam is, comes a smell of pus, pus and dissolution. Often literally; as one more Christian village is eradicated.

Also in London the situation was clear: Two Muslims have killed a man on the street and their motive was pure Islamic aggression against a non-Muslim. "But it was a soldier!" say the left wingers then. "And he was in Afghanistan!" Yes, but why was he in Afghanistan? That was a response to Islamic aggression on 9-11 which came to us. This strategy, in which left wingers blame Western violence, is very easy to see through. It is a reversal of cause and effect. Which left wingers constantly do. You see it very clearly when it comes to Israel and the Palestinian Arabs. Left wingers are whining than about "roadblocks" but refuse to wonder why those roadblocks were erected.

A third issue that stands out among people, to whom Joris Luyendijk is a hero, is that they are hyper critical toward the West and that they are almost completely blind to failures elsewhere and certainly failures in the Islamic world. That those people do not hang themselves for shame is the thing that surprised me most of all.

So what we have here?:

1. Moral equivalence: the act in itself is assessed without regard to motive, situation etc..

2. Reversal of cause and effect: a response to aggression is seen as initial aggression.

3. A hypercritical attitude towards the West and an extreme indulgence regarding the crimes of Muslims.

Those three degenerate in a disgusting notion that reads: We, Westerners, are much worse than Muslims everywhere and guilty. All suffering on earth is the fault of the West.

Maybe Luyendijk was drunk, or he was hit by the poisoned atmosphere in England. He works for The Guardian. A paper which holds the point of view that essentially there is nothing wrong with Islam. No, the Western attitude toward Islam is wrong! The Guardian came out yesterday with a great article that clearly stated that the entire Muslim community of England is doing everything to stop Islamic terrorism. That's just downright fabricated. But The Guardian hates the West and hold for that reason a lot of Muslims. I in turn nurture a fierce hatred of The Guardian and all the left junk that looks like. The world is there to forgive.

Dear readers: I suffer from murder fantasies regarding the authors of these publications. I wish upon reading this fashionable gibberish of Luyendijk from deep in my heart that Luyendijk may be the next passer-by that will be attacked by a machete, a large butcher knife and a gun. Then Joris will just says: "I am not afraid! You're only a terrorist if I'm scared! So what you are doing is futile!"

But according to a source close to the inquiry, the arrested man is said to be close to "radical Islamic" milieux. "He is a young Islamist, a recent convert, and already known to police specialists for his religious convictions," confirms another source involved with the case. However, he was not known as "follower of jihad", the source cautioned, urging prudence, the investigation having only just begun. "The investigation should determine at what point he tipped over into jihadist project," added one of the sources. Until now he had been known to the police services for petty and medium-level crime, particularly theft, a police source specified.

This happened at a passport centre in in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. If the same thing had happened in Europe, we could expect a global outcry.

The people shown in the video are mainly immigrants who will have come to Saudi Arabia as legal immigrants, under the tutelage of a nominated sponsor. When they switch sponsor, often because their original sponsor has no more work for them, they lose their legal status. Since the start of the year, Saudi Arabia has expelled 200,000 immigrants. (Again, if any European country had done this, you can imagine the global hysteria.) The immigrants have come to the passport centre, hoping to regularise their position. But the Saudi official has had enough of them and ushers them out of the complex with the aid of a whip.

I've written a few times about the proposal to build an European Islamic Centre in Munich (ZIEM) and the campaign against it led by Michael Stürzenberger [pictured in the image]. Stürzenberger aims to collect enough signatures to trigger a referendum on the construction proposal. Munich's multicult-friendly ruling caste, by contrast, wants to just wave the project through. Bizarrely, in an attempt to counter Stürzenberger's increasingly successful campaign, the government of Munich is now displaying "anti-Islamophobe" messages on the infoscreens in the city's subway system. This is bizarre, Orwellian madness and a scandalous waste of taxpayer resources!

Police in Corfu have arrested an illegal Afghan immigrant after he robbed a 20-year-old student and callously threw her over an eight-meter coastal wall. Police were surprised to find the Afghan had tattoos of swastikas and other Nazi symbols on his body.

Pantelis Haidos, the father of the young history student that was viciously attacked, described her ordeal to Zougla. He said she was returning home from a night out with friends when the alien Afghan robbed her. The young woman immediately handed over her purse when the robber demanded it, but as two cars approached the Afghan threw the Greek girl over the coastal wall.

Ms. Haidos is hospitalized but now out of danger. Meanwhile the criminal perpetrator has been charged with robbery and attempted murder. He will undergo a DNA test to ascertain his true age as his travel documents indicated he was 17-years-old but police have stated that his appearance is that of an older adult. If the man is indeed 17 he will be held in a young offenders’ jail rather than an adult prison.

According to Xryshaygh the Afghan criminal had applied for political asylum in Greece but had not been held in detention.

Proto Thema reported police are also perturbed by the swastikas and other Nazi symbols tattooed on the man's body. The man refused to answer police questions regarding his tattoos but stated he was a Muslim.

Human rights organizations report almost daily on alleged racist attacks against immigrants by Greeks but fail to report on the frequent attacks against Greeks by illegal immigrants.

Chaotic scenes played out on Friday afternoon in
Favoritenstraße in the 10th district. At an information stand of the Favoriten Freedom Party [tn: Favoriten is a distict of Vienna], in front of dozens of eye-witnesses, three youths of Turkish origin tried to get hold of a Freedom Party banner and make off with it. When a Freedom Party official told them to stop this, the immigrants reacted with vile insults and verbal attacks. In addition, they threatened the officials and punched one on the head. When another district official tried to make an emergency call to the police, he was kicked, said the district secretary of the Favoriten Freedom Party, council member DDr. Eduard Schock.

Almost a third of public transport users in Germany feel unsafe or threatened at railway stations or bus stops. In the buses and railways themselves almost 1 in 10 regularly feel "not very or not at all safe". That is the result of a representative poll conducted by the opinion research institute Forst that "Welt" has been given advance notice of.

There have been many high-profile cases in Germany where Germans were attacked and sometimes beaten to death by Turkish colonists, so it's hardly surprising that Germans are now fearful of public transport. This is the effect of diversity generally, as demonstrated by Robert Putnam. People retreat into their private spaces because those are the only places where they feel comfortable. The domination of public space is also one of the key imperatives of Islam.

Taboo: voxpop about Mohammed

Probably nothing makes Muslims who take to the streets more furious than criticism of their prophet. Only a few persons — who are frequently faced with death threats — dare state their honest opinion about Mohammed, who may or may not have lived some 1,400 years ago. But what do ordinary men or women think of him? Dispatch International has asked a number of ordinary Danes and Swedes their opinion of the man who started Islam. Of those who had the courage to speak out, we got some very down-to-earth statements about one of the most influential figures in history.

“It would be utterly unscientific to make any sort of claims about the Arab prophet Mohammed, as there is no original evidence of his life or actions, such as coins carrying his name, as would have been minted quickly at that time. The – varying and contradictory – descriptions that do exist of Mohammed, arose centuries after he is supposed to have lived and died, which is highly unusual. Apart from that, the behavior that the Quran ascribes to him is extremely controversial and deeply shocking,” says Erik (66), a pensioner in Copenhagen.

“I feel nothing for him. Full bear, turban and a scimitar is not exactly my type (laughing).” Sofie (21), student of English, Aarhus

“I have always wondered why anyone would want to follow a man like Mohammed. If anyone in our society were actually to try to follow his example, I believe he would be diagnosed as a paranoid schizophrenic and be jailed for pedophilia. From what I have heard and read about him, he comes across as a man mainly interested in gaining power over others and fulfilling his own desires by using the words of God.” Søren (42), physiotherapist, Odense.

“What I feel for Mohammed? Nothing” Göran (32), pedagogue, Malmö

“It is incomprehensible to me how many uncritically follow a man who obviously is not quite in his right mind.” Mike (26), IT consultant, Frederiksberg

“He must have been a really ugly guy, since he does not want images to be made of him (laughing)” Anne (22), student of English, Aarhus

“Judging from the behavior of his followers, one may safely assume that he has some problems with his temper. This is not a man I would like to have as my neighbor.” Isak (50), architect, Stockholm

“According to what I have read, I do not believe that he existed. He was merely a legendary figure, meant to be the focal point of a culture, and a model for Muslims lacking the courage to go on Jihad.” Maja (38), school teacher, Stockholm.

“If he really existed, I think he was nuts. He heard voices, he had sex with a minor girl, killed lots of people, and proclaimed himself a prophet. Today, this kind of person would be in an institution for the criminally insane. I don’t feel as much for him as for the billion people forced by the Sharia to follow his example. In particular the women.” Marina (56), school teacher, Stockholm

“As for my feelings towards Mohammed, who is considered the ideal man for Muslims to emulate – even today – I must admit that I do not have any. Mohammed is, according to recent archaeological research, a fictive person invented to provide legitimacy for the rule of the Caliphs and for imposing ancient Arabic law, Sharia, in the countries conquered by Muslims. On the other hand, I have lots of compassion for those Muslims who even today are forced to live under a system worse than Medieval Europe, in particular that puts the women under the control of the family and the clan. Liberating the Islamic world from political Islam, and – most importantly – giving Muslim women their freedom back, is a worthy task for idealists of our age.” Holger, 49, historian, Skjern

Muslim culture still practices inbreeding and has been doing so for the better part of 1400 years. Consanguineous marriages were originally sanctioned by Islam’s prophet Muhammed, who had a very liberal view on men’s sexual relationships. In addition his many sex slaves, he married several cousins, the divorced wife of his own adopted son and the six year old Aisha, with whom he had sex with when she was nine.

A rough estimate shows that close to half of the world’s Muslims are inbred as a result of consanguineous marriages. In Pakistan, 70 percent of all marriages are between first cousins – children of siblings – and in Turkey the share is 25-30 percent.
Statistical research on Arabic countries indicates that up to 34 percent of all marriages in Algeria are blood-related as are 46 percent in Bahrain, 33 percent in Egypt, 80 percent in Nubia (the southern part of Egypt), 60 percent in Iraq, 64 percent in Jordan, 64 percent in Kuwait, 42 percent in Lebanon, 48 percent in Libya, 47 percent in Mauritania, 54 percent in Qatar, 67 percent in Saudi Arabia, 63 percent in Sudan, 40 percent in Syria, 39 percent in Tunisia, 54 percent in the United Arabic Emirates and 45 percent in Yemen. According to Dr. Nadia Sakati of King Faisal Specialist Hospital in Riyadh, 45 percent of married Arab couples are blood-related. . The fact that many of these couples are themselves children of blood-related parents increases the risk of negative consequences.

The number of blood-related marriages is lower among Muslim immigrants living in the West. Among Pakistanis living in Denmark the number is down to 40 percent and it is 15 percent among Turkish immigrants. This may be due to the fact that immigration rules make it difficult to import family-related brides. Another factor may be better information on the risks connected with blood-related marriages. Because of better human rights protection it is also more difficult for traditional Muslim families to force their children to marry within the family.

In spite of the lower percentage of consanguineous marriages among Muslims living in the West, at least 55 percent of Pakistanis living in the United Kingdom are married to a first cousin. This is thought to explain why British Pakistani families are at least 13 times more likely than the general population to have children with recessive genetic disorders – often resulting in serious genetic diseases.Several studies show that, on average, children of consanguineous marriages have lower intelligence than children of non-related parents. The average intelligence quotient, IQ, in any age group is 100. Depending on the theoretical basis, the line between normal intelligence and low intelligence is 90 or 85. Below 70-79 is categorized as mild disability, 50-69 is moderate disability. Significantly more low-IQ children drop out of school and remain unskilled workers throughout life.

There are many studies on the intelligence effects of inbreeding among cousins. One study from Bihar, India, on Muslim children living in suburban areas, shows that while outbred offspring have an average IQ of 95, inbred children have an average IQ of 79, which puts them in category of people with “low intelligence” having special needs in schools, difficulty handling simple job tasks and completing a basic education. The study also shows the social profiles like visual fixation, social smile, sound seizures, oral expression and hand grasping are significantly delayed among the newborn inbred babies. A decrease in the ability to understand and react to social interaction is known to have a negative influence on children’s development, including social skills and empathy, later in life.

Other studies reach similar conclusions, also when adjusted for socioeconomic status. The cognitive consequences of Muslim inbreeding may explain why non-Western immigrants are more than 300 percent more likely than native Danes to fail the Danish army’s intelligence test. It may also be part of the explanation why two-thirds of school children with Arabic backgrounds are illiterate after 10 years in the Danish school system. The connection betweenlow intelligence and a lack of ability to be self-supporting is well established. The extreme lack of scientific and social contributions from the Muslim world may be another result of inbreeding. While 184 Jews have received the Nobel Prize for their scientific, social and artistic contributions to the world, only 10 Muslims have had this honor.

Since 1901 Jews have received 34 percent of all Nobel Prizes. The world Jewish population in 2012 is approximately 14 million whereas the total number of Muslims is estimated to number 1.5 billion.

The risk of stillbirth doubles when parents are first cousins. A study comparing Pakistani children of consanguineous marriages with Norwegian children shows a 50 percent higher risk that babies die during birth. Infant mortality among the inbred Pakistani children was more than double that among the Norwegian children. Deaths due to disorders such as cystic fibrosis and spinal muscular atrophy were 18 times more common among the Pakistani children and deaths due to multiple malformations, which may be part of unrecognized autosomal recessive syndromes, were 10 times more common.

Other research concludes that inbred people have a higher risk of developing mental disorders such as depression and schizophrenia. The practice of consanguineous marriages in Muslim families may thus explain why more than 40 percent of the patients in Denmark’s Sct. Hans Hospital for the criminally insane and 70 percent of the inmates in Danish youth prisons have immigrant backgrounds.

The consequences of consanguineous marriages may also bring us closer to an understanding Islamic terrorism. One study suggests that many suicide bombers are suffering from depression. Among some Muslims their actions are considered a socially acceptable way of committing suicide in order to end mental torment.

A study from Kabul, Afghanistan, based on autopsies of the remains of suicide bombers, shows that close to 90 percent were suffering from severe illnesses or deficiencies such as blindness, cancer, missing limbs or leprosy. Many Muslim societies, including that of Afghanistan, have a low social acceptance of handicaps and mental illness. Being physically handicapped or mentally retarded often leads to exclusion. Becoming a martyr may be the only chance of achieving social recognition and honor. Some cases of Down’s syndrome may be another unpleasant effect of inbreeding and al-Qaeda has been known to use people afflicted with it. People with low intelligence may also be more easily convinced that Islam, with its promise of 72 virgins to Muslims who die fighting for their religion, is true.Inbreeding among Muslims has severe social implications both for the Western societies and the Muslim world. According to Danish Social worker Merete Lefelt, “When cousins have children together, they are twice as likely to have a disabled child. … Disabled immigrant children cost Danish municipalities millions. In Copenhagen the number of disabled children … has doubled over 10 years.” She has contacted 330 families with disabled children in Copenhagen and estimates that one-third of her clients have a foreign cultural background. The cost of special education for slow learners consumes one-third of the Danish school budget. This means less money for normal and gifted learners. 51 percent of the children in Copenhagen’s three schools for children with physical and mental handicaps have immigrant backgrounds.

High levels of education may also make it harder for inbred students to finish their studies. Students with minority backgrounds have a significantly higher dropout rate at secondary schools than youths with a Danish background. In business schools, the dropout rate among immigrants is 60 percent, twice as high as among students with a Danish background. Interestingly the dropout among young people with Lebanese or Iranian background is far greater than among people of e.g. Vietnamese background. (Center for Knowledge on Integration in Randers, May 2005 “Youth, education and integration“).

The limited ability to understand, appreciate and produce knowledge as a result of low IQ is probably part of the reason why Muslim countries only produce one-tenth of the World average when it comes to scientific research. In 2003 the world average for production of scientific articles was 137 per million inhabitants, whereas the average among 47 Islamic countries was just 13.

The video appears to suggest that the Paris attack could be inspired by the Islamist murder of a British serviceman in London.

Anti-terrorism investigators now say they have "high quality images" of a "tall, athletic bearded man" aged about 30, possibly of North African origin, praying near the spot where he attacked the 23-year-old soldier from behind with a knife or a box-cutter on Saturday. He then fled into a crowded train station and is still at large.

"He was filmed praying near where the attack took place. After the attack he can be seen leaving the shopping centre of La Défense (business district)," a source close the investigation told Le Parisien.

This article in Le Figaro says the images clearly show the man's face and that they have been distributed to the intelligence services involved in monitoring radical Muslims. But why not publish them so that neighbours and passers-by could help with the search? Obviously because they fear it would generate negative feelings about Muslims. As in so many rape cases in Europe now, where authorities refuse to publish descriptions of the third-world attackers, the government is yet again playing politics with the lives of Europeans. Maintaining support for their mad project of repopulating Europe with Asians and Africans is more important to them than protecting their own people.

The worst consequence of the colonisation of our countries by third-world peoples is not jihad; it is not crime; it is not the parasitism of our welfare systems and consequent bankruptcy of our public exchequers. It is the abridgement of our freedoms.

Third-worlders come to live within European civilisation in effect as refugees from their own failed countries. The third-world, by definition, has failed. Failed to achieve societies that offer prosperity and freedom to those who live in them. Why this is so, why some countries succeeded and others didn’t, is perhaps the most important question in the secular realm. Marxists tell us the third-world failed because evil whitey came and enslaved it. Europe-hating sophisticates like Jared Diamond tell us it was all a matter of luck. A dice roll. But the simple truth is that the third world failed because it didn’t respect freedom. The freedoms Europeans fought to achieve against the wishes of their rulers gradually led to greater opportunities for talent, the dissemination of knowledge, and the spread of prosperity. The third world became the third world because the people who lived there did not value freedom enough.

And when those same people come to live in our countries they don’t jettison their cultural baggage. They bring no sense of having come from a failed culture into a successful one. Instead, they lap up the Marxist-tinged self-hatred of European elites, blame whitey for their own historic failings and not only maintain their own decrepit cultures but hyper-emphasise them. They continue making the same failed choices that their ancestors made, based on the same failed values, enshrined in the same failed cultures. But this time they’re doing it here. In our countries. Through the ballot box. And this puts a constant pressure on our weak-kneed politicians to conform to their freedom-hating agenda. The tangible result is the continuous restriction of European freedom since third-worlders began to colonise our lands. As well as voter pressure, their own barbaric behaviour serves as the pretext for further restrictions on freedom. The result of the third-world presence is a constant corrosive effect on liberty.

That’s why I won’t be joining in the celebrations about the new initiatives announced by the British government in response to the Woolwich jihad attacks: shutting down websites, spying on communications, etc. These will restrict the freedoms of everyone who lives in Britain, including the soon-to-be minority who actually are British. And the nature of our Equality Cult-driven politics being what it is, we can be sure that these measures, originally introduced to combat jihad, will be later extended to the “far-right”, in other words the people who saw what the effect of large numbers of Muslims living in our countries would be long before the politicians did. This is exactly what happened to the insane Prevent scheme, which was brought in to target Islamic radicals and ended up subsidising them while targeting “Islamophobes” instead. Equating the jihad and the Counterjihad – those who carry out murderous attacks and those who merely chronicle their barbarity and warn about its future consequences – has long been one of the favourite rhetorical gambits of the western multicult. See Nick Cohen’s piece in the Observer for a despicable recent example of it in response to the Woolwich attack.

For the first time since 9/11, the similarities between violent movements in the west are more important than their differences. They replicate and feed off each other. So entwined have the English Defence League and radical Islam become, they might as well be married.

…The attacks by radical Islamists in the west today are not very different from the attacks on mosques that followed the murder of Drummer Rigby or the bombings organised by the "dissident" IRA: small scale, mean in every sense of the word and pointless.
The similarities do not stop there. The founders of the English Defence League were inspired by Islamists who disparaged British troops. The EDL has in turn produced the Muslim Defence League. David Anderson, Britain's independent reviewer of terrorist legislation, is so concerned by the reciprocal relationship between certain religious groups and the white far right, he is thinking of investigating whether the police are treating both partners in this ugly waltz equally.

Cohen says the EDL and the jihadists need each other. What a laughable claim. As if anyone in the EDL, or the Counterjihad movement more broadly, wants to do this with their lives. Who in their right mind would want to expose themselves to physical threat, arrest, social ostracism, the risk of being deprived of their livelihood, and all the other life-crushing sanctions that the multicult totalitarians have brought into play to defend their corrupt system? We are doing this in response to problems that a government immigration policy has created. We didn’t need these problems in our lives. We didn’t need these problems in our country. Defence is not the moral equivalent of attack. Drawing attention to the threat posed by murderous barbarians is not the same thing as being a murderous barbarian.

The token gestures proposed by the government do nothing to address the underlying problem. The single most important metric describing the magnitude of the jihad threat Britain faces is, very simply, the number of Muslims who live here. An immigration policy that is allowing the Muslims to double their number every decade makes any tinkering with security policy largely irrelevant to containment of that threat.

The correct policy response to the jihad threat is not to restrict the freedoms of all UK citizens. So what is it? First, a distinction should be made between those with historical roots in the country and more recent arrivals. For a hundred years after their arrival in the country, immigrants and their descendants should be subject to a positive duty of integration. Those who fail to meet this duty should be removed from the country. This duty should be applied retrospectively to everyone who had an immigrant ancestor within the last hundred years. These probationary citizens will have a special status in law that could render them subject to specially intrusive measures, such as surveillance. This legal distinction would allow governments to tackle the jihad threat without abridging the freedoms of genuinely British people.

Second, all Muslims should be required to register as such with the government. Being an unregistered Muslim should be a criminal offence. This will allow the government to take such special security measures as it deems necessary to contain the threat of jihad, against the specific group that poses that threat, without abridging the freedoms of others. If jihad militants are intent on carrying out an attack, it is, of course, unlikely that they would register as Muslims with the government. That in itself, however, is a useful warning sign that could flag up a future threat. If someone participating in Islamic activities is found to be an unregistered Muslim, the intelligence services should thereafter pay special attention to them. In addition, the offence of being an unregistered Muslim will offer an easy conviction, establish a criminal record and allow the opportunity to deport if the offender is an immigrant.

Third, Participation in Jihad should be made a capital offence and participation should be defined very broadly to include even expressing support for the idea of jihad. The Woolwich attackers flaunted their own support for jihad for years before carrying out their attacks. All such people, such as Anjem Choudhary and his mob, all of those who promote jihad ideas or march under jihad flags, should be charged with Participation in Jihad and put to death. If there are 1000 jihadists in Britain, execute 1000 people. If there are 10,000, execute 10,000. If there are 100,000, execute 100,000. Kill them all. There is no advantage to Britain or the world in keeping these people alive.

Why do Muslims riot in Sweden? The short answer: For the same reason they riot every where else.

There have been several attempts at explaining the carefully planned Muslim riots and attacks around Stockholm. Poverty and lack of education are broadcast widely as the main causes of what is called intifada in Arab ("rebellion" or "resistance").

Though we may see kidnappings and demands of ransom as every where else in the world with rebelling followers of Islam, the violent Muslim men around Stockholm have not demanded money. Nor have they expressed a wish for free access to universities.

What we do see is a repetition of a pattern that has appeared everywhere in history and the world today, where large numbers of Muslims live in non-Islamic areas: Muslims attacking authorities representing secular non-Islamic laws - often accompanied by their religious slogan "Allahu akbar". While Muslims embrace the rule of home-made sharia courts, patrolling Muslim father groups and religious leaders, police and municipal institutions are attacked still more often, as the Muslims' self confidence and power increases with their growing presence.

It is not only arrogant when well educated people with a steady income claim that too few hours in school or too little kroner in the bank account make people worse citizens. It reveals an immature and one-dimensional view on we complex human beings and denies the well known psychological fact that such powerful factors such as upbringing, background culture and religion play a vital role in people's choices and values.

If it really was true that money makes people peaceful, all rich people would be exemplary human beings and we should fire our armies of social workers who work in vain to make Muslim integration happen, and give their salaries directly to the immigrants, that seem to be just as unhappy and ill-mannered here as in their home countries.

Islam is different

Islam is not a normal religion, since it does not just concern inner beliefs, but also sets the rules for how society must be ruled, including regulations for Muslims and non-Muslims. According to the Quran, man-made laws - democracy - is blasphemic, since only Allah's laws are to rule on Earth. Muslims are destined to rule over infidels, who in a Muslim society can chose between conversion, become second class citizens (dhimmis) paying protection money (jizya) or be killed. Reading the many hateful statements on infidels and direct orders to suppress and kill unbelievers, one does not have to be a psychologist to understand why Muslims rob, rape, abuse and persecute non-Muslims everywhere, also in Sweden.

Since a part of Islam concerns society, Muslims are not fully able to live according to Allah's wishes, unless society follows the guidelines in the sharia. Islamization and jihad against the rule of unbelievers is thus a religious duty.

What surprises many in our modern, secular societies is that Muslims take their religion so much more seriously. Death penalty for conversion, strong social control and fear of Allah's punishment after death for the less obedient have managed to keep Muslim culture on a medieval level while the most of the rest of the world evolved into peaceful high tech egalitarian societies with a much higher appreciation of knowledge than of faith.

It is no coincidence that it is the Muslims, and not any other immigrant group, that behave in such an extraordinarily criminal way. Islam is an unconstitutional religion that orders its followers to violate basic human rights and commit violent crimes. No one should wish to grow up in such culture and be forced to follow the sharia, and it would be an act of compassion to liberate those who do.

Why do Muslims riot in Sweden? For the same reason they riot everywhere else."

Thanks to patroling parent groups, the Muslim mini-civil war in Stockholm ebbs out. Frightening, that the Swedish police cannot handle the problems alone, and unheard of that they allow Muslim parent vigilante groups in this way. It is not okay that the Swedish police in this way hands over power to ordinary citizens and lets them do the very dangerous work of patroling against extremely violent groups. This is just another case of Stockholm syndrome, where the Swedes are taken hostage by violent Muslims and allow patroling groups of male sharia-style moral police to take over the streets. The Swedish police has proven itself weak and irresponsible - which is the worst signal that they can send to the extremists.Calling vigilante "volunteers" and "good forces" is Orwellian and not very convincing:

"Stockholm police spokesmen said on Sunday that rioting, which youths began a week ago in capital's outlying northeastern suburb of Husby appeared to be easing.
"We are on the way to normalizing the situation," said spokesman Kjell Lindgren. "There were no violent gatherings of people or violence against our officers."
He added though that on Saturday night windows had been smashed at a school in southern Stockholm and 16 people arrested. Elsewhere in Stockholm, soccer fans had gathered outdoors to watch broadcasts of the Champions League final from London.Parents walk streets to deter tensions
Lindgren referred to volunteers and parents who had walked streets to deter trouble, saying "the strong presence of the good forces, and police reinforcements" had helped to calm tensions."

In France a mass demonstration (or series of demonstrations) is being held today called "Manif Pour Tous" [Demonstration for Everyone]. In essence, it's a protest against the recently-approved gay marriage bill, but its significance transcends that. This single, seemingly trivial issue has led to a crystallisation of conservative forces in the country, in a way not seen in decades. It has been compared in significance (even by a horrified Le Monde) to the left-wing '68 movement, but in reverse; a kind of counter-revolution. It remains to be seen whether it will have long-term effects on the politics of the country, and on issues that are more important.

Gotta love this quote about it:

A far-right commando team has taken the Socialist party headquarters by assault!